Comment quantum frequency converters (Score 1) 34
> quantum frequency converters, which compensate for residual frequency differences between the photons
Would it be too much to ask to call them Heisenberg Compensators? Please, it would be fun.
> quantum frequency converters, which compensate for residual frequency differences between the photons
Would it be too much to ask to call them Heisenberg Compensators? Please, it would be fun.
China's geology is really bad for petroleum production. A bad lot in the luck of the draw.
They are building a monster pipeline and rail system across Mongolia and Siberia to Russian reserves but it's a decadal project.
Electric transportation is a smart option for their situation. Their necessity has become their Mother of Invention and they are dominating the world in electric power systems innovation.
If we're graduating Seniors with Junior level math skills that's hardly "Can't do Math."
I suspect even that claim is wrong and we're also teaching the wrong math for an informed electorate. In undergrad we need people sharp in probability and statistics more than matrix algebra. So they can be numerate against politicians' bullshit. I guess we should ask politicians to work on that.
Some of us are neither Republicans nor Democrats but would support a strong 10th Amendment with strict observance of Article I limitations.
But nearly all the Democrats and Republicans want to selectively choose which parts of the Constitution to ignore. There is no will for Rule of Law.
The Congressmen get elected on the principle of stealing money from one person to give it to five. That's a guaranteed win in a Universal Suffrage system with no strong moral foundation.
The trick is they inflate the money supply to actually do it so everybody pays. The five "winners" suffer the most in real numbers.
I'd rather see a stable Constitutional order but it's fantasy to believe that's achievable. We'll see fiscal collapse, likely War and a Draft, and chaos instead. All because oligarchs and the poor want "free stuff". And it's hard to blame the poor when everything they want is unachievable for them because the markets are all rigged against them.
The Gini Coefficient is too damn high, so don't get between them and the guillotines.
The advertising companies don't deliberately make it annoying. They just make it because they are forced to in order to continue to do what they do
There are quite a few companies that you don't see any sort of notice on because they do not want to store cookies on your computer unless you sign up for an account, then that sort of consent is implicit. Companies want to track you, store data on your PC, and keep it there for long times in exchange for letting you read some content someone posted years ago. The EU legislation requires them to make it explicit when they do this.
Advertising companies are forced to 'make it annoying' because their entire existing is to erode your privacy. The harder it is for you to click a toggle in the 600 plus analytic trackers some websites have (and i've seen some with this many), the more likely you are to just say "Screw this I want my content now" and just click accept.
Its not misinformation. The vast majority of websites you go to ARE NOT sites you have logged into. When creating an account you can easily opt in or opt out at the same time you're giving your own personal details. There are very few websites I go to (none in fact) where I click a preference and want it to be saved in a cookie where I have not logged in, and if I created an account I, again, can give consent when I create my account, and I *never get asked again*.
Of course you need to ask for consent. It does address third party cookies and tracking consent as well, except that most companies don't follow it, most websites list ~600 plus third parties, and the average user doesn't give two shits about their privacy.
Why the hell would I want a developer from a random website saving shit on my hard disk that I didn't explicitly consent to?? I know the internet has gotten shit but I can't believe people want to remove one of the few positive privacy things that have come out in recent years.
The BCG vaccine has also been found to be effective against bladder cancer. One of the two manufacturers bailed out of the market about a decade ago, limiting supply for both TB and bladder cancer.
They just opened a new manufacturing facility in Durham this past Spring to make much more. Not sure if it's producing yet, but it was a four-year build.
TB affects so few Americans that you can't even get BCG for TB prevention if you want it. Hopefully high-risk folks will be able to elect to get it soon.
> The software had a built-in limit of 200 bot detection features. The enlarged file contained more than 200 entries. The software crashed when it encountered the unexpected file size.
A built in limit is:
if ( rule_count > 200 )
log_urgent('rule count exceeded')
break
else
rule_count++
process_rule
This sounds like it did not have a built-in limit but rather walked off the end of an array or something when the count went over 200.
I heard earlier today that a court has determined that since governments are using all of this data, including license plates, that a FoIA request for all of the license plate data gathered from Flock in a city area for a range of dates was valid.
They want to have a power advantage over their serfs but turning their advantage into a burden changes that dynamic. Something to look into for those so inclined.
We seem to be well past the point of being able to expect them to follow the Law or "do the right thing".
> I see no reason why the government shouldn't be allowed to buy the same data that jim-bob the farmer can purchase.
Jim-bob is likely to face some serious problems if he smashes down your door and drags you away in a pre-dawn raid.
The IRS people get a promotion.
This is why the Constitution places strict limits on the actions of government agents.
(in its original interpretation)
Here I am about to think "damn, people losing their jobs to AI" and then I realize its the "pizza in 4-easy payments" people.
They should probably go all-in on AI as soon as possible. For their investors' sake.
OK, that was pretty funny. +1.
Irrationality. I remember it well. Quoting Wikipedia: "Irrational exuberance" is the phrase used by the then-Federal Reserve Board chairman, Alan Greenspan, in a December 1996 speech given at the American Enterprise Institute during the dot-com bubble of the 1990s.
Fuck debit cards. A: no rewards.
The PayPal debit card pays 5% on the category of your choosing - Groceries, restaurants, fuel, etc.
Bitcoin relies entirely on SHA256 ASIC's for hashing and they typically need replacing every year or two because more efficient models come out making the old ones unprofitable, especially at halvings. Due to the RoI and first-mover advantage the profitable ones are very expensive.
If you want to heat your home with proof-of-work, use a coin that uses RandomX or some other deliberately ASIC-resistant algorithm (usually CPU mining).
You can pool mine on an old CPU and still get a few pennies for your efforts, though if you want to invest in an EPYC and have other uses for it (maybe you have work jobs to run during the day and want more heat on cold nights) it could actually be profitable.
Resistive electric heating is still a very expensive way to heat, though some people don't have better options. There's a development near where I am that was built shortly after Nixon announced Project Independence and every house (cold climate) has wall-to-wall electric baseboard heating.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo. - Andy Finkel, computer guy